Pennsylvania's election laws were amended by the state legislature (and ratified by the governor).
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The Supreme Court will decide if Donald Trump can be kept off 2024 presidential ballots
- Thread starter Stevicus
- Start date
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
So he started out with a lie. How is that supposed to help?
He was still lying. Is he trying to get the crowd mad at him for thinking that they are idiots? Once again, how is lying about the election supposed to help?
Too late for that. One member of an armed mob was shot dead when she foolishly crossed a line that could not be crossed. Nor were they respecting the police officers. They almost crushed one and probably, it cannot be prove, to blame for the fatal stroke of an officer later that day.
It is not a claim, it was obvious that he waited too long. He should have done it immediately, and as you know, Trump was well aware that he was lying. He could not have meant it.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Did she storm the Capitol and ask for new electors to be sent? IOW, you're using "false equivalence".
Wandering Monk
Well-Known Member
Trump isn't being prosecuted for exercising his free speech rights, as the special counsel points out in his indictment:
3. The Defendant had a right, like every American, to speak publicly about the election and even to claim, falsely, that there had been outcome-determinative fraud during the election and that he had won. He was also entitled to formally challenge the results of the election through lawful and appropriate means, such as by seeking recounts or audits of the popular vote in states or filing lawsuits challenging ballots and procedures. Indeed, in many cases, the Defendant did pursue these methods of contesting the election results. His efforts to change the outcome in any state through recounts, audits, or legal challenges were uniformly unsuccessful.
4. Shortly after election day, the Defendant also pursued unlawful means of discounting legitimate votes and subverting the election results. In so doing, the Defendant perpetrated three criminal conspiracies: a. A conspiracy to defraud the United States by using dishonesty, fraud, and deceit to impair, obstruct, and defeat the lawful federal government function by which the results of the presidential election are collected, counted, and certified by the federal government, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371; b. A conspiracy to corruptly obstruct and impede the January 6 congressional proceeding at which the collected results of the presidential election are counted and certified ("the certification proceeding"), in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1512(k);and c. A conspiracy against the right to vote and to have one's vote counted, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 241. Each of these conspiracies—which built on the widespread mistrust the Defend
Laniakea
Not of this world
The question asked and answered was, "No, you can't claim that many politicians have claimed that the election was stolen".
Copernicus
Industrial Strength Linguist
And Clinton never claimed it in the same sense that Trump has. She formally conceded the election to him shortly after it was over and has conceded that she lost the ballot count by slim margins in some states. Trump still claims that the ballots were miscounted and that he did not lose his election.
Clinton did claim that the election was "stolen" in the sense that some state legislatures restricted voting rights in order to game the election in their state--something that they were able to do legally. She also maintains that Trump benefitted from illegal hacking by Russia and their misinformation campaign. There is strong evidence to support that complaint in the Mueller report, even though Mueller was obstructed by the Trump administration in gathering evidence to prosecute Trump himself. More minor campaign officials were prosecuted on various criminal charges. So, Clinton has acknowledged that she lost her election legally, not that there was cheating in ballot counting.
Laniakea
Not of this world
Even lititia james couldn't even say Trump was legititmately elected. Even ran a campaign based on her lie: https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics...mp-2018-comments-running-office-cnntm-vpx.cnn
Wandering Monk
Well-Known Member
Might want to read up on this case: New York civil investigation of The Trump Organization - Wikipedia
Laniakea
Not of this world
Why? It's the result of what that James character was running a campaign on, even though she didn't even have a case at the time. Just an anti-Trump campaign slogan.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
More unsupported claims in the face of evidence.
Wandering Monk
Well-Known Member
So what? If there was no evidence, Trump would not have been convicted.
It was widely known that the Trump org was doing shady business for years prior to James taking office in January 2019.
Laniakea
Not of this world
If there was not a corrupt judge who indicated from the beginning that he decided Trump was guilty from the beginning of the trial, he would not have been convicted.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
I see that you are totally ignorant about the trial. Both sides presented evidence before the trial. Both sides asked for a "summary judgment". That is a judgement before the trial began. How is that "corrupt"?
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
As pointed out to you several times now, he didn't make that video until a couple of hours into the insurrection (after he'd been gleefully watching it unfold on television), after everyone around him, including his children, had been begging and begging for him to call it off.
And what happened when he put this video out calling it off? His supporters listened to him and started dispersing.
Imagine if he'd only posted that video at the START of the insurrection, how many lives and damage could have been saved.
Laniakea
Not of this world
How many lives (that you care about) were actually lost on Jan. 6th?
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
You don't know? Do you know how many Capitol Police were injured? Any clue?
Listen, all you gotta do is go to YouTube and mention January 6th and there are several links that will show you what happened.
BTW, I watched it as it happened and was appalled, and now I'm equally appalled at the small-brained Trumpettes who try and diminish what happened and why it happened.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
And let's not forget the rioter who lost her life because she was the first member of an armed mob that was breaking into a part of the Capitol where they had to be stopped.
What is odd is that people who would have no problem shooting dead a black man that was the first of three who was himself unarmed, but the two behind them had a heavy chain and a club, that was breaking into their own home in self defense will complain because this one woman was not armed herself. Frankly the rest of the mob should have been charged with felony murder.
I did not want any lives to have been lost on either side.
Laniakea
Not of this world
Ah, now someone being injured is equal to "lives lost". Got it.
Laniakea
Not of this world
And yet it's ok for a black man to shoot an unarmed white woman who wasn't seen doing anything violent at all.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Apparently, my point went well over your head. There were five lives lost, if my memory is correct, but don't those who suffered injuries matter to you even one iota?